techno-leadership

take me to your leader?

today, the accelerated churning out of technological innovation is undeniably changing the landscape in which we live, study and work at an exponential rate. this state of constant technological enrichment directly affects the way in which we interact with one another. likewise, as we continue to become more and more interconnected, i believe that our responsibility for each other as fellow citizens in a shrinking world grows, and grows.

given this steady abundance of technological advancement, and hence our new state of global connectivity, i believe that leadership has a very special calling at this moment in our history; a calling laden with urgency, obligation and again, responsibility.

**************************************************************************
bring your leader to me.


technological innovations in a corporate setting can mean streamlining various operations and processes. and yes, technological innovations have changed the way the electorate gets to know its political candidates or even casts its votes for them. and again yes, technological innovation has certainly contributed to far more than just that. but the specific impact that i consider to be of utmost importance here, is the powerful impact that technology has on transformational change, and therefore transformational leadership.

technology: (noun). the process by which humans modify nature to meet their wants and needs.

transformational leadership: (noun). leadership that creates valuable and positive change in the followers.

at no time in our history have we ever been as plagued as we are now with such dire crises and threats against our civilization. and at no time in our history have we ever been so powerful to lead by virtue of technological robustness. it is therefore at this very moment in our history that our leaders must harness the full potential of technology to affect large-scale transformation.

if you consider that among the many other benefits of our technological advancement, leaders are now capable of virtual interaction, forming virtual meeting places, and of being across the world in a matter of hours, there is no excuse for inaction or ineffectiveness any longer. it is no longer as simple as following the leader; but how effectively the leader follows you.

people long for the sort of leadership that will help create common identity, goals and a cohesive story; leadership that will get us out of this mess. this is precisely that calling for leadership i referred to above. it is perhaps a matter of life and death. a matter we are responsible to address.

procrastinate, i do not...

only, it's pretty unsettling when you emerge from a week of reading- hours upon hours, literally, and you feel that you have even less of an understanding about a topic than when you began.
this is why my second post has been slow in coming. for days, i thought if i simply re-read the material, jotted down more extensive notes, replete with charts and graphs- i'd be able to sort it all out and arrive at the correct conclusion. the correct conclusion! the correct conclusion?
you see, i presumed there was a conclusion.

not the case.

the topic: leadership (of course). more specifically, as i see it, the attempts which have been made throughout the 20th century to understand what makes an effective leader; the research undertaken to create a quantifiable list or empirical map of the various components that result in the leadership phenomenon.

and as i studied each of the three distinct approaches separately, i was convinced and sure of its superiority over the other two- the voice in my head decidedly in agreement:

• the trait approach: leaders are totally born to lead, dude.

• the skills approach: dude, everyone can learn to be good leaders.

• the style approach: dude...

this readiness to subscribe to each of the three distinct perspectives on leadership (i'd like to think) bespeaks to a lesser extent my own stooge-like tendencies, while emphasizing the sound elaborate research as presented in each case (and forget about the fact that my inner voice inexplicably sounds like keanu reeves, i pondered the studies long and hard and critically).

*************************************************************************
in sum, while trying to determine which of the three perspectives i favored, i realized how inextricably related they all are. and so, instead of drawing any sort of qualitative conclusions in regards to the three approaches, i propose a quick exercise to aid in (my own) understanding of them:

what would it look like in my organization if:

1. the trait approach ruled- ...
2. the skills approach ruled- ...
   
3. the style approach ruled- ...
   

now, i'll have to get back to you with my answers to this self-assigned exercise (a subsequent blog entry soon to come), but my point is that the concept of effective leadership should best be seen as resulting from the convergence of various aspects inherent in each of the different approaches.